When Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman last week said he didn't appreciate being called a "thug" — calling it the equivalent of the N-word — he opened yet another national dialogue on race.Is the word "thug" a synonym for that ugly racial label? Can it be? And in what context?The short answer is: You bet. The longer answer has everything to do with the situat...

When white old people, women and children are viciously assaulted by cowardly black thugs playing the "knockout" game, there is no doubt about who and what they are, except for liberal "journalists" like Caldwell who refuse to mention their race in their stories, to prevent them from being charged with hate crimes.

The propaganda by the right is starting to fizzle. People are onto the games, and are rejecting or embracing the labels to dilute the meaning. Care to scare the bigots, as if they are not already scared enough? Thugs of the world unite!

But Sherman's back story, his ascension from Compton, Calif., to an honors student at an elite university, is antithetical to the thug narrative. And that's why the conversation is so interesting.

By the way that Mr. Sherman presented himself, one would never know that he was anything other than, well, what he presented himself as. And I am not buying the explanation that he was pumped up on adrenaline and excitement after playing a tough game. The guy presented himself as a thug - threatening violence towards the other player.

If one does not want to be thought of as a duck, one should not walk and talk like one. People will think you are a duck.

Actually, I understand that Sherman was pumped up on adrenaline and the rush of just winning the second biggest game of his life, so what he said is not that horrible under those circumstances. It is similar to how police involved in a dangerous chase are pumped up on adrenaline and have difficulty controlling themselves and have been known to brutalize their suspects immediately following the chase.

That being said, let’s be honest. When people of color do not like the criticism leveled at them, many times they instantly call "racism." Moreover, why should they not? In today’s PC world, we have more and more "victims" in minorities who are not held to the same standards of behavior or speech as non-minorities. This is just another result of the indoctrination that our press, education establishment, and politicians have successfully foisted on the American people.

Welcome to the new America, folks, the land of double standards, no personal accountability, ever-increasing victimhood and a constantly changing set of “racist’ words that apply only to white people. Meanwhile we allow blacks to say the same words with impunity, and a complicit press, education establishment, and PC crowd turns a blind eye and deaf ear to the obvious hypocrisy.

Reap what you sow, America.

Democracy can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse out of the public treasury. From that moment on the majority will always vote for the candidate promising the most benefits from the treasury...followed by a dictatorship

Answer : yes. Ronnie Raygun dog whistled with phrases like "young bucks", "states rights" and lies about "welfare queens". As Atwater said, saying the n-word backfires on those using it, so now they have to be only a bit more sly...but still give the nod to racists in the base by using coded language.

These days it is words like "thug".

Of course, those using the Southern Strategy aren't nearly as slick as they think they are...

Whatever... don't believe the hype or you will end up having others define who you are.

Football players are basically paid to be thugs on the football field, it's kind of the point. Thugs are people who play a physical role, such as bouncers, body-guards, etc.

I guess what it comes down to is being forced to like people because they are black Americans... of course I like this obnoxious guy who offered me food on the rightrail; he's black... oh yes, say something about my gf's appearance and that you like it.

What's sure is the the commentariat will always find something at fault with the language of middle Americans, because they are so much more caring and educated than we.

If by "thug" you mean a member of the defunct bands of murderers, mainly islamic, who used to roam India, or the lowlifes who resemble them in behavior, be careful never to call someone dark-complected a thug lest you be judged a bigot by some ignorant elitist who neither knows the etymology of the word nor cares about the facts of the matter.

The "victim" class will always find some way to blame you for calling out their bad behavior. You see, they know it's not their fault they don't follow the rules of civil society. The man put them down, you know. It's all whitey's fault! Or maybe George Bush's fault. Anyway, no matter what you object to in their vile behavior, you are the one to blame, not them.

thinkingahead wrote:Just wait, the left will tells who they are, what they think, and what's important to them.

A thug use to be a bully. However with the way the left continues to change to language to fit whatever their latest liberal accusation is, bully is left to the schools after a shooting.

A "thug" is often a young, black, poor, inner-city male and the label comes with at least a whiff of criminality, Mayes said.

So is the professor telling us intercity poor black males are labeled 'thugs', only because they are intercity poor black males. Or is behavior a factor?

If behavior is an element of a thug, what has the professor done to change the behavior of these intercity poor black males labeling, other then write about it, and excusing it.

What has any liberal done, to better the lives of these intercity poor black males?

The unemployment rate amoung blacks in Obama's economy, is near 30%. And the word thug is the problem. Go figure.

How's that Hope and Change working for them?

What have Republicans done for "inter city poor blacks"? Much less so you have been exposed for the racist you are, ( check out the percentages when Republicans are in control). Conservatives think they are being sensitive and are carrying the torch for decency but they fail everytime. Its not that Democrats are much better but Republicans do their share of smearing groups of people.All one has to do is "listen" on this Denver Post site or any other Conservative leaning site. The term "thug" is used and used often by Conservative hotheads especially in describing Liberals and especially unions. Trayvon Martin was called a thug on many posts. Walking down the street while black automatically gets you labeled with terms of endearment from the far right. So Caldwell hit the nail on the head where these far right "torch bearers" have just changed the terms in describing others. Your code has been busted and its an "element" of your "behavior" !

I find this funny. It reminds me of the various words used to non-pejoratively label people with less than normal intelligence. All of them started off as a way to be polite and the meaning keeps being offensive so the words become offensive. person, moron, dummy, challenged, handicapped, special, missing, empty, stupid, etc.

There is a particular subculture that is mostly black men. It has characteristics which many of us don't like. The language will continue to adapt itself to the reality. When the reality changes, the language will mean something else.

throatwarbler wrote:Socialists hate being called socialists. Thugs hate being called thugs. Same thing. It takes socialists straight to their obsession....their favorite subject....RACE!

Conservatives and Capitalists bend over backwards to hide from their own RACISM and spend countless diatribes obfuscating about it. They always play the WHO ME game and deny who lurk's within their ranks. Conservatives and Capitalist's flee to their almost 100% white enclaves and then proclaim superiority. Capitalist's hate being called polluters and spend countless years denying they ever do it. Capitalists and Conservatives manipulate our economy all the time and then spend countless years denying fault when the economy collapses. They are obsessed with denial and always have been when it come to RACE too!

throatwarbler wrote:Socialists hate being called socialists. Thugs hate being called thugs. Same thing. It takes socialists straight to their obsession....their favorite subject....RACE!

Conservatives and Capitalists bend over backwards to hide from their own RACISM and spend countless diatribes obfuscating about it. They always play the WHO ME game and deny who lurk's within their ranks. Conservatives and Capitalist's flee to their almost 100% white enclaves and then proclaim superiority. Capitalist's hate being called polluters and spend countless years denying they ever do it. Capitalists and Conservatives manipulate our economy all the time and then spend countless years denying fault when the economy collapses. They are obsessed with denial and always have been when it come to RACE too!

I was going to address the errors in this post, but there's just too many. Every sentence is entirely backwards.

Udall vs Gardner isn't really about Udall or Gardner.

It's about HARRY REID, and whether he gets to keep his job as Senate Majority Leader. Do you like the job he's done making Congress function for the last 8 years? Yes? No?

Many people do use proxy words in place of taboo words like the N word or other racial slurs that are not considered acceptable anymore. You have thug, ghetto trash, hood rat, etc. that all are used with racial undertones by some people. As far as "thug" is concerned...some people use it as a proxy racial slur and some use it how it is intended. Richard Sherman is not a thug. He broke no laws, didn't threaten anyone...hell he didn't even use a curse word in his rant. A thug is a violent criminal or someone in power that uses intimidation and violence to get his way...ranging from a gang/mafia enforcer all the way up to a dictator like Putin/Jong Un/etc.